Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Wikipedia gets a lot of donations from the uk. I’m not sure how many Brits would continue putting £10-100/mo into a charity that explicitly doesn't operate in their borders.


Wouldn't make a dent in their budget. They are not poor by any means.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statisti...


The annual cost is about 150 million, and they have a war chest of half a billion? If I remember correctly. Yeah, I don't think anything will do a dent, unless like everyone decides to never donate again.


Wikimedia's expenses and wikipedia expenses are not the same. wikipedia does not spend anywhere near $150 million a year.


Any stats on this? I'd be surprised if the number of Brits putting £10-100/mo into Wikipedia greatly exceeds 10.


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2023-24_Report

Best I can find

    $    132,466.01  Africa
    $  4,902,373.13  Asia
    $ 49,423,340.29  Europe
    $106,546,895.77  N.America
    $  2,509,299.46  Other
    $  6,082,217.76  Oceania
    $    944,844.22  S.America


It looks from another chart like 21% of revenue is recurring, so $10 million annually for Europe.

Convert that to GBP and you get about £7.5 million.

Figure that the UK accounts for about 15% of the European economy and assume it contributes to Wikipedia at about an equal share.

That's about £1.125 million in estimated annual recurring contributions from the UK.

You said 10-100/mo, so let's assume £55/mo or £660/year as the mean.

That would be about 1,700 Brits, a surprising number.


I'm surprised you're reiterating surprise: you were off by two orders of magnitude, and the initial surprise only had purpose as a rhetorical device, it wasn't based on anything (why is > 10 surprising? 70M people in UK...)


Yes, that was just reiterating the initial surprise which as you suggest was rhetorical mostly.


Gotta factor in fire-and-forget donations vs repeat donations. So halve that number?


I assumed Britain would not be Europe but “other”


Europe isn't EU, EU isn't Europe.


Why would you think that? Leaving the EU was not a geographical event


Just imagined on the day of brexit whole set of islands just started drifting few hundred kms towards west (or south-west given how canary islands often feels like british overseas territory?) to underscore the leaving part.


Dig up beaches on the east coast, dump as landfill on the west coast. Nothing's too much trouble for The Great Experiment.

Of course, Ireland will have to move out the way. (Wait, is this an actual metaphor for Brexit?)


Islands off the cost of a continent are still generally considered to belong to the continent. IE Japan is still in Asia, Cuba is still in North America, etc.


Eh - for the world's audiences: EU is not Europe. I geddit how/why why people equate eu == europe - it would simplify things for all, one niggle less to consider. But - it ain't so, for better or worse. There are countries in Europe, that can't be members of the European Union, or could be, but don't want to be members. (e.g. UK, probably Island, Switzerland, some of the Nordics) There are no countries in the European Union, that are not part of Europe. So EU <= Europe. (unsurprisingly)


Cyprus isn't in Europe geographically, it's in Asia.

There are also the various territories of larger countries that aren't - French Guaiana in South America, Canary Islands are off the coast of Africa.


> probably Island

?


i think they meant Ireland, which is a member of the EU and has a populace that strongly desires to continue to be, according to https://gov.ie/en/department-of-foreign-affairs/press-releas...


> that strongly desires to continue to be

Can confirm


Iceland - sorry for the confusion. (poor spelling)


https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/ch...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: